Advertisement

Good game, for low-pc or for high-pc?

Started by November 25, 2001 05:01 PM
4 comments, last by eng3d 23 years, 1 month ago
First, Wolfenstein, run only for 386 machine, then doom run for a new-pentium machine (or a fast 486), next Quake, quake2 and quake3 run for the fast machine. What is better : -high req. then a superb-game! with many fx, sound and more but only for expensive pc (and graphics card). -low req. :then anyone can play with this. Of course, slow pc can run with 320x200 but is ugly and in many cases is unplayable. At least, ID-Software choice for high req.!. In fact the future quake3 can need a 1000mhz (minimus!) for a decent play.
-----------------------------------------------"Cuando se es peon, la unica salida es la revolución"
Actually I've played the Quake 3 demo on my 233 Mhz Pentium with a 16 Megs Vanta video card, and it worked good. The high tech games generally scale pretty well towards lower end systems.

Edited by - Diodor on November 25, 2001 6:08:54 PM
Advertisement
It all depends. If you want to shift units, you aim as low as possible. Just remember that when you choose your specifications, that the ''average PC on sale'' is far better than the ''average PC in the home''. It''s easy to be misled into thinking that, since you can''t buy anything slower than a 700MHz CPU any more, that everyone has something that fast. The reason PC sales have declined recently is because people don''t feel the need to upgrade all that often. There''s a hell of a lot of P200s and P300s sitting around that are adequate for most people''s needs, especially if they have a decent graphics card.
Wolf ran quite well on a 286, and I first beat Doom on a 386. No speed issues with either at all.
-----------------------"When I have a problem on an Nvidia, I assume that it is my fault. With anyone else's drivers, I assume it is their fault" - John Carmack
You should take into account how long it is going to take you to develop the game. Three years ago, my 350 Mhz Pentium II was a decently fast computer. If I had started a 3 yr. development cycle then, aiming for average user speed, my game today would not be up to the abilities of today''s average user speed. If your game is going to take a long time, I would aim at the higher end computers.

FragLegs
It is not the point, in fact, for example Wolfenstein (the old), can run in a old machine. Wolfenstein is good, because the stereo sound, the superb graphics, and more, but in a 286 you have a little screen, a 8bits mono sound, ...

When you play some new-games in a low-end pc, you in some cases can play without problems, but when you see the same game in a high-end pc, you logically notice the diference!.

The company allow to old-pc to play this game, but you only have a 70% or less of the game.

For example, play quake3 in a old machine :
-first, disable almost all effects.
-second, reduce the sound quality
-third, reduce the resolution

Quake3 was created, thinking in a some average-to-powerfull machine (in the time of creation).

-----------------------------------------------"Cuando se es peon, la unica salida es la revolución"

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement